A class action would be more efficient in dealing with a slew of lawsuits against Ottawa for "institutional bias," the federal court is told.

A class action would be more efficient in dealing with a slew of lawsuits by Czech Roma refugees against Ottawa for “institutional bias,” the federal court was told Monday.

Otherwise, the court would probably be “inundated” with hundreds of individual cases on similar allegations, said lawyer Rocco Galati, who represents 16 Roma asylum seekers and has 15 similar complaints against the federal government in the queue.

On Monday, the Roma refugees asked Justice James Russell to certify their lawsuit as a class action against the federal government, Immigration Minister Jason Kenney and former Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon.

Their lawsuits stem from Kenney’s public comments describing the Roma as “bogus” refugees, the foreign affairs department’s imposition of visitor visas on people visiting from the Czech Republic, and a country report produced by the refugee board in 2009 justifying refusal based on the argument that there is state protection available to the Roma in the Czech Republic.

Galati said those events, together, constitute a “reasonable apprehension of institutional bias” against Czech Roma refugees by the government and deny them access to a fair asylum determination process.

A court decision favourable to the Roma could potentially reopen hundreds of failed asylum cases and put a stop to the use of the country report in refusing Czech Roma refugees.

Government lawyer Mary-Louise Wcislo urged the court not to certify the class action because the process would be “complex and expensive.”

For instance, parties must send out notice of the class action to concerned individuals and develop an opt-out scheme for those who don’t want to be part of the lawsuit, causing unnecessary “delays and expense,” Wcislo argued.

The court, she added, could always resurrect the class action after hearing the evidence and facts by the plaintiffs and defendants.

But Galati said sending out class-action notices and designing an opt-out scheme are “not rocket science.” It costs $2,000 to put ads in legal publications and set up a website — plus a $45 monthly administrative fee — to inform people of the class action, Galati noted.

Earlier, Wcislo had asked the court to strike some portions of the plaintiffs’ statement of claim, arguing that they were too vague and general.

“The assertive conclusions, opinions and assumptions are just not good enough,” Wcislo said.

But if that’s the case, Galati contended, the government should have filed a motion for particulars, not a motion to strike.

The court reserved its decision.

More on thestar.com

We value respectful and thoughtful discussion. Readers are encouraged to flag comments that fail to meet the standards outlined in our
Community Code of Conduct.
For further information, including our legal guidelines, please see our full website
Terms and Conditions.